GLAAD - Religious Libertyhttp://www.glaad.org/tags/religious-liberty
enThese 'license to discriminate' bills: What they're doing and why they're doing ithttp://www.glaad.org/blog/these-license-discriminate-bills-what-theyre-doing-and-why-theyre-doing-it
<div class="field field-name-field-blog-featured field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><img height="253" width="450" style="height: 322px; width: 500px;" class="media-image media-element file-media-original" id="4" src="http://gladblog.org/sites/default/files/styles/1200px/public/NWJkNDRjZWJjOWMz_19594.jpg?itok=5Oxs5s82" alt="" /></p>
<p>The current news cycle is <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=religious+freedom+bill+gay&amp;safe=off&amp;client=safari&amp;sa=X&amp;rls=en&amp;biw=1200&amp;bih=822&amp;source=univ&amp;tbm=nws&amp;tbo=u&amp;ei=8mMFU5WHPMvNsQTA8oKwDw&amp;ved=0CCUQqAI">filled with stories</a> about proposed laws in various state legislatures which seek to chip away at existing anti-discrimination laws so that business owners who cite their personally-held faith can deny goods and services to LGBT people, and both sides are very charged up. Anti-LGBT activists, who for the past couple of years have had a very hard time finding (or fundraising off of) anything resembling a win, are charged up because they think they've caught on to something that could change their fates and the overall conversation. People who support equality are charged because they can't believe such proposals could ever see the light of day in basic conversation, much less in statehouses across the nation.</p>
<p>But while this is all new to someone who follows the so-called "culture war" either casually or not at all, those of us who geek out on this LGBT (/anti-LGBT) political stuff have known to expect this for years. </p>
<p><strong>A condensed history</strong>: Almost as soon as the now-deemed-unconstitutional Proposition 8 passed at California's 2008 polls, groups like the National Organization For Marriage began cultivating a meme claiming that they, the folks who had just stripped millions of citizens of a court-tested right, were the true "victims." They began searching for the one or two stories that they could sell the way they had already sold the one or two tales of Massachusetts parents whose kids' public school days were supposedly now a morass of gay-led awfulness, thanks to that state's marriage equality. After finding a few supposed "victims" (cake bakers, florists, photographers, inn keepers), they used them to sell the new message:<strong> </strong><em>Same-sex marriage is a threat to religious freedom</em>. From there, other conservative policy shops like the Heritage Foundation and the Becket Fund (to name just two) began shaping and polishing, leading us to now, a time when this fake victimization is finding its way into genuine legislative debate. </p>
<p>That's the basic "what." To understand the "why," you have to look at what the anti-LGBT movement always does when they fight us on our issues. For instance:</p>
<ul><li>When we say we all deserve the freedom to marry the person we love under civil law, they claim we are "attacking marriage" and that they are on defense.</li>
<li>When we said we all deserved the right to serve country without fear of a witch hunt based on our sexual orientation, they claimed we were "undermining troop cohesion" and threatening the military's mite and morale.</li>
<li>When we fight for a federal and fully inclusive Employment Nondiscrimination Act, they make it all about anti-LGBT employers who will lose the "right" to fire/not hire people simply because of sexual orientation or gender identity.</li>
<li>When we say we just want equality and peace of mind, they claim we are overreaching for "special rights" that come at great expense (to lives, nations, children—you name it!). </li>
</ul><p>Detecting a theme here? In every instance, the other side's strategy has been to cast us as the villain. As the threat. As the social ill. As the reason we Americans can't have anything nice.</p>
<p><img height="264" width="480" style="height: 313px; width: 500px;" class="media-image media-element file-media-original" id="4" src="http://gladblog.org/sites/default/files/styles/1200px/public/6a00d8341c730253ef01a3fcbc1d2e970b-800wi.jpg?itok=CJ6InUZZ" alt="" /></p>
<p>It's obvious why the thinkers on the other side came up with these tactics. Discrimination is a bad thing. America has always wised up to that fact eventually. If you are someone who feels compelled to fight for a social movement even thought you know that a great many people instinctively view as discriminatory, then you have to come up with something that can maybe—possibly, hopefully, pretty please!—flip the more obvious script. For the movement that has spent the past few decades fighting for more discrimination against LGBT people, this rewriting effort has been built almost fully around the notion that the maligned population is actually the antagonistic team.</p>
<p>Which brings us back to those bakers and florists and photographers. Even though these are cases where people who obtained business licenses in states where they knew (or should've know) that anti-discrimination laws are in effect sought the truly special right of selectively ignoring such laws, the crowd that is driven first and foremost by a desire to score points against the LGBT equality movement (and in many cases, by a coupled paycheck as well) is turning back to this same, old, tired tactic of turning the denied person into the supposed tyrant. </p>
<p>Of course the folks who are pushing this new meme are coupling it with that other canard that they love to misrepresent: religious freedom. If you read one of their commentaries or listen to one of their pundits talk on the TV box, you will barely hear mention of the actual human beings who suffered the indignity and embarrassment of being told their sexual orientations rendered their money no good in that particular establishment. Instead, the wrong-side activists talk about the poor, poor shop owner who has supposedly lost a previously undiscovered right to pick and choose which anti-discrimination laws they must follow and which they can deny due to their personal and arbitrary morality tests. Yet again, they do this because focusing on the person who is truly at the heart of the incident (i.e. the denied customer who had the valid complaint) too clearly lays out the stakes. They think if they focus on a public good that America supports, religious freedom, they can hide a form of ugliness that Americans (and especially Americans of a certain age) know all too well. </p>
<p>This whole debate about bakers and florists would be the kind of thing that we could meet with little more than a rolled eye, if not for the fact that they are actually making some headway in state legislatures. The state of Kansas managed to defeat the first of these bills to get real national attention, but that was just the preamble to a longer fight. Right now, there are <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/02/19/idaho_anti_gay_segregation_discrimination_against_gays_will_be_legal.html?wpisrc=burger_bar">a pair of bills on the move in the Idaho legislature</a> that would allow private employers, government workers, and businesses of all kinds to refuse service to gay people, so long as the deniers claim religion as their basis. The Arizona senate <a href="http://www.bilerico.com/2014/02/breaking_az_senate_passes_right_to_discriminate_bi.php?utm_source=front_page&amp;utm_medium=top_story&amp;utm_campaign=Top_Story">just passed a similar piece of legislation</a>, and the legislature of even the reliably blue state of Maine <a href="http://maineprogressiveswarehouse.me/2014/01/24/maine-takes-up-ld-1428-an-act-to-protect-religious-freedom/">is considering the noxious idea</a>. Other states (Oregon, Tennessee, Ohio, Nevada, Utah, South Dakota, to name a surely incomplete list) are either currently considering, threatening to consider, or have narrowly beat back (for now) one of these odious bills. The anti-LGBT movement has given full buy-in to this strategy, and this movement is nothing if not indefatigable. This is unlikely to go away any time soon.</p>
<p>That being so, I have some questions for the pro-discrimination crowd. I'm curious:</p>
<ul><li>Why only the anti-discrimination laws that apply to LGBT people? If a business owner can sidestep the protection as it applies to LGBT people, what stops a radical shopkeep from citing personal faith as reason to deny a customer based on gender? Or race? Or national origin? And so on. </li>
<li>How gay, exactly, does an occasion have to be in order to be turned away? Weddings get all the attention, but what about anniversary parties? Or Mothers' or Fathers' days where the apostrophes are where I placed them? Or cupcakes for a California school's Harvey Milk Day celebration? What, exactly, trips the wire so that the shunning of a customer goes from being an unfair business practice to being an expression of Christ's love?</li>
<li>Your side is fond of saying that the expanse of religious liberty doesn't end at the church door—so where does it end? If licensed business owners can cite personal faith in order to get around public policy concerning discrimination in public accommodation, where should we expect it to stop? If this is okay in state-licensed business practice, why not in public schooling? At the DMV? From cops and firefighters? Where is the limit?</li>
<li>If this is your new standard, how will you equally apply it? Will bakers start offering questionnaires demanding to know if brides- and grooms-to-be have been sexually active prior to marriage? Will they follow all customers to their wedding receptions to ensure that the decorum and mores of the assembled guests is something they can personally support? Or will they just be hypocrites?</li>
<li>If we pro-equality activists sought a bill granting us the right to sidestep anti-discrimination laws that protect people of faith, can you estimate (a) how much outrage you all would generate, (b) how quickly you'd launch some sort of national day to rally around the spurned customer, and (c) how little you would care about our conscience rights? </li>
</ul><p>Those are just a handful. I have more questions, and I intend to ask them. Because I am tired of playing defense against a movement that so proudly tears us down then so spinelessly accuses us of doing the ripping. If they want to falsely paint us as the side that's on the offense in this debate about whether or not customers should be treated fairly, then we're going to have to go on the offense (without being offensive) and call them out on their cynical politicking, their fallacious narrative, and the dangerous precedent they're trying to impose on commercial exchange here in America.</p>
<p>So to recap:</p>
<p><strong>What they're doing</strong>: they're making us sound like threatening bullies whose mere attempt to purchase an advertised product is tantamount to aggression. </p>
<p><strong>Why they're doing i</strong>t: because the anti-LGBT movement's whole charade does depend and<em> has always depended</em> on making our basic freedoms seem thorny while making their crude, divisive, and exclusionary ideas smell like roses. </p>
<p><strong>Why we must challenge it:</strong> because I'm not willing to live in an America where it'll be common and acceptable to put signs like this in a store window:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img height="374" width="450" style="height: 374px; width: 450px;;;;;;;;;;" class="media-image media-element file-media-original" id="4" src="http://gladblog.org/sites/default/files/styles/1200px/public/nohesign.jpg?itok=Kq80Ab_n" alt="" /></p>
<p>Are you?</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pubdate field-type-datetime field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single">February 20, 2014</span></div></div></div>
<div class="field field-name-field-issues field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/news">News</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/issues/local-and-regional-news">Local and Regional News</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/religion-and-faith">Religion and Faith</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<!--
THIS FILE IS NOT USED AND IS HERE AS A STARTING POINT FOR CUSTOMIZATION ONLY.
See http://api.drupal.org/api/function/theme_field/7 for details.
After copying this file to your theme's folder and customizing it, remove this
HTML comment.
-->
<div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/discrimination">Discrimination</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/turn-gays-away">Turn the Gays Away</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/kansas">Kansas</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/south-dakota">South Dakota</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/arizona">Arizona</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/religious-liberty">Religious Liberty</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
Thu, 20 Feb 2014 01:39:10 +0000jeremyhooper69950 at http://www.glaad.orghttp://www.glaad.org/blog/these-license-discriminate-bills-what-theyre-doing-and-why-theyre-doing-it#commentsKansas' discrimination bill too discriminatory to passhttp://www.glaad.org/blog/kansas-discrimination-bill-too-discriminatory-pass
<div class="field field-name-field-blog-featured field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><img class="media-image media-image-right" id="4" style="float: right;;" src="http://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/styles/1200px/public/Susan%20Wagle_0.jpeg?itok=6SlNl3Ch" alt="" />A bill that passed by the Kansas House on February 12<sup>th</sup> providing cover for anyone who refuses to provide services to LGBT people will not pass the Kansas senate as it is currently written. Senate President Susan Wagle expressed concern about the impact on businesses who refused services to gay and lesbian couples. Additionally, Wagle said she would like to see the language about extending protections to individual state and local government employees removed. “Public service needs to remain public service for the entire public,” she said.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/kan-senate-leader-discrimination-bill-wont-pass/2014/02/14/d507b7e4-959d-11e3-ae45-458927ccedb6_story.html">The Washington Post</a> reports:</p>
<blockquote><p>“I believe the intent of the House was to protect religious liberties. We respect that, but the business implications are going to harm the practice of employment in Kansas,” said Wagle, a Wichita Republican. The measure would prohibit government sanctions or lawsuits over faith-based refusals to recognize same-sex unions or to provide goods, services, accommodations or employment benefits to couples.</p>
<p>The House’s passage of the measure prompted strong reactions across the country and from several businesses organizations and employers in Kansas, including AT&amp;T, who issued statements urging legislators to stop the measure or rework it. The businesses said the provisions would hurt them and in some cases place them at odds with their own nondiscrimination policies.</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>Thomas Witt, executive director of Equality Kansas, said the group sent proposed changes to a House committee before the chamber’s vote that could have addressed some of the current concerns. “If the Senate chooses to move forward with hearings, we look forward to working with them to draft language that will protect the religious liberties of all Kansans, while at the same time ensuring the dignity of gay and lesbian couples across the state,” Witt said.</p>
<p>Most Senate Democrats oppose the House bill and think the issue should be left alone this session.</p>
<p>“I think she made the right decision,” said Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, a Topeka Democrat. “I don’t think there is any sense in trying to beat a dead horse on this bill that basically legalizes discrimination.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There is now bipartisan opposition to such a drastic bill. You can read the full story in the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/kan-senate-leader-discrimination-bill-wont-pass/2014/02/14/d507b7e4-959d-11e3-ae45-458927ccedb6_story.html">Washington Post</a>. </p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pubdate field-type-datetime field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single">February 18, 2014</span></div></div></div>
<div class="field field-name-field-issues field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/news">News</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/issues/local-and-regional-news">Local and Regional News</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<!--
THIS FILE IS NOT USED AND IS HERE AS A STARTING POINT FOR CUSTOMIZATION ONLY.
See http://api.drupal.org/api/function/theme_field/7 for details.
After copying this file to your theme's folder and customizing it, remove this
HTML comment.
-->
<div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/kansas">Kansas</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/doma">DOMA</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/marriage-equality">Marriage Equality</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/religious-liberty">Religious Liberty</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
Tue, 18 Feb 2014 19:21:53 +0000nicholascoppola69924 at http://www.glaad.orghttp://www.glaad.org/blog/kansas-discrimination-bill-too-discriminatory-pass#commentsReligious expression, the myth of the persecuted Christian, and anti-LGBT discriminationhttp://www.glaad.org/blog/religious-expression-myth-persecuted-christian-and-anti-lgbt-discrimination
<div class="field field-name-field-blog-featured field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span id="styles-0-0" class="styles file-styles 750px"> <img src="http://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/styles/750px/public/bill-of-rights-7471-20111112-51.jpg?itok=bNNpZA8n" alt="" title="" /></span></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>As the movement for marriage equality continues, it is an unfortunate inevitability that backlash from those opposed to it increases. When it comes to public and governmental institutions, fair and equal access is now becoming increasingly protected by law, e.g. the Defense Department's extension of rights to married LGBT couples, the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, and access to public housing for married LGBT couples. Yet, when dealing with private institutions, the issue becomes far more complex and nuanced, especially when anti-LGBT business and private service providers cite their guaranteed freedom of religious expression as a justification for their discrimination. </p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/02/sweet-cakes-by-melissa-closed-_n_3856184.html">bakery in Oregon</a> recently refused to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple, stating it was their "Christian" obligation to refuse to provided services to an LGBT married couple. After some costly litigation and investigative inquiry by state officials, the bakery chose to close its doors. There was a sign left in the window: "We will continue to stand strong. Your religious freedom is not becoming free anymore".</p>
<p><img class="media-image media-image-right" id="3" style="float: right;;;" src="http://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/styles/1200px/public/ReligiousFreedomStamp.jpg?itok=fYQvQmiB" alt="" /></p>
<p>As society becomes more connected and people become more educated about the lives of LGBT people, tolerance and acceptance increases. Yet, as this slow cultural shift occurs, there is an often unforeseen consequence. Those opposed to LGBT equality on religious grounds now erroneously believe that the diminished influence of their voice entitles them to special protection.</p>
<p>We cannot allow our guaranteed right of religious expression to become a shield for those who choose to oppress. Groups who use their religious beliefs to oppose LGBT equality now believe that there has been some inversion of the social order; they erroneously believe that those who they continue to oppress now are oppressing them. The sign in the Oregon bakery is alarming because it turns the oppressor into a victim. The focus should remain on the lesbian couple who were unfairly denied access to a business service – a secular business whose job is to bake cakes and muffins, not consecrate bread and wine.</p>
<p>It is undeniable that freedom of religious expression is one of the principles which led to the founding of this nation. The Pilgrims left one Plymouth for another in search of a new land where they could worship without fear of persecution. Religious freedom exists in order to prevent discrimination. Using it as a justification for continued discrimination is antithetical to its very purpose.</p>
<p><img class="media-image" height="266" id="2" style="height: 266px; width: 425px;;;" width="425" src="http://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/Thanksgiving-Brownscombe.jpg?itok=E4hVir6w" alt="" /></p>
<p>At one point in time, the Bible and arguments regarding the freedom of religious expression were used as a justification for institutionalized racial discrimination, chattel slavery, and prohibition of interracial marriage. Conservative preachers would cite the Bible as a means of adding divine ordinance to their man-made social constructs of inequality. They were too myopic and arrogant to distinguish between Biblical principle and Biblical practice.</p>
<p>This distinction must also be made in discussions of the law. Laws guaranteeing the freedom of religious expression exist based on the principle – one that is constitutionally enshrined – that none should be discriminated against. When this law is put into practice in a manner that leads to the persecution of others it is a perverted and maligned miscarriage of justice. </p>
<p>When voices like those of the discriminatory bakery owners are elevated by the media, a dangerous fallacy is perpetuated; the myth that Christians in America are a persecuted group. This myth is the foundation on which those opposed to equality base their distorted view of religious liberty. When anti-LGBT religious activists are given a sounding board by the mainstream media, false credibility is ascribed to them, enabling them to influence a greater number of individuals. Denying these pundits the ability to express their opinions – regardless of their lunacy – is just as un-American as distorting the definition of freedom of religious expression. Thus, it is the job of the media, in their quest to provide balanced and objective coverage, to use resources like GLAAD’s <a href="http://www.glaad.org/cap">Commentator Accountability Project</a> in order to uncover the history and credibility of various ant-LGBT commentators. By creating an environment of complete transparency within media coverage, anti-LGBT religious pundits lose their ability to portray themselves as “oppressed” and thus their ability to shield themselves from scrutiny with cries for freedom of religious expression.</p>
<p>The next time you hear a commentator claim that their inability to deny services to LGBT individuals with in a secular context somehow violates their freedom of religious expression, remember two things. First, remember to investigate the credibility of the commentator using GLAAD’s<a href="http://www.glaad.org/cap"> Commentator Accountability Project</a>. Second, remember that using constitutional rights as a means of denying them from others is never acceptable.</p>
<p>If you ever hear any form of defamation against LGBT persons by the media, remember to <a href="http://www.glaad.org/reportdefamation">report the incident to GLAAD</a>!</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pubdate field-type-datetime field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single">September 12, 2013</span></div></div></div>
<div class="field field-name-field-issues field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/news">News</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/issues/local-and-regional-news">Local and Regional News</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/religion-and-faith">Religion and Faith</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<!--
THIS FILE IS NOT USED AND IS HERE AS A STARTING POINT FOR CUSTOMIZATION ONLY.
See http://api.drupal.org/api/function/theme_field/7 for details.
After copying this file to your theme's folder and customizing it, remove this
HTML comment.
-->
<div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/religion-and-faith">Religion and Faith</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/christianity">christianity</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/anti-lgbt-discrimination">anti-LGBT discrimination</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/religious-liberty">Religious Liberty</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/oregon">Oregon</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
Thu, 12 Sep 2013 03:52:16 +0000patrickkeough68042 at http://www.glaad.orghttp://www.glaad.org/blog/religious-expression-myth-persecuted-christian-and-anti-lgbt-discrimination#commentsJim Daly: Failure to subscribe to our talking points = media biashttp://www.glaad.org/blog/jim-daly-failure-subscribe-our-talking-points-media-bias
<div class="field field-name-field-blog-featured field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><img class="media-image media-image-right" height="250" id="2" style="height: 250px; width: 250px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px; float: right;;" width="250" src="http://www.glaadblog.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/NewMexico1.png?itok=QFEQMMoP" alt="" />Focus on the Family president <a href="http://www.glaad.org/cap/jim-daly">Jim Daly</a> is among the voices trying to drum up outrage over the New Mexico photographer who, <a href="http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2013/08/new-mexico-supreme-court-rules-photographer-cannot.html">according to her state Supreme Cour</a>t, must serve LGBT customers in a way that doesn't fly in the face of her state's nondiscrimination laws. To bouy his claims, Daly is relying on a popular place of attack for folks who operate from his point of view: the mainstream media. </p>
<p>The Focus president writes:</p>
<blockquote><div><strong>[I]f you only watch the evening news, you probably weren’t aware of this very real threat to religious freedom.</strong></div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>That’s because the reporters themselves don’t know that when homosexual “rights” and religious liberty are at an impasse, it’s people of faith who often end up losing out.</strong></div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>Last year I met with various national-level secular reporters during a trip to New York. In one instance, we talked about same-sex marriage, and I referred to this threat to religious liberty. My comment was met with incredulousness.</strong></div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>“How are your religious liberties threatened by gay marriage?” they asked me.</strong></div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>No wonder the mainstream media isn’t covering this. And let me make this clear – I’m not even suggesting this is a cover-up. They simply don’t know. Even venerated journalists like CBS’ Bob Schieffer are in the dark about what’s going on. [<a href="http://community.focusonthefamily.com/b/jim-daly/archive/2013/08/30/new-mexico-the-media-religious-liberty-and-you.aspx">SOURCE</a>]</strong></div>
</blockquote>
<p>Daly links that final part about Bob Schieffer to <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57591694/face-the-nation-transcripts-june-30-2013-hayden-olson-perkins-and-davis/">a recent appearance</a> in which which <a href="http://www.glaad.org/cap/tony-perkins">vehement anti-LGBT voice Tony Perkins</a> attempted to convince the venerable anchor that the trumped up cases in which certain vendors (bakers, florists, photographers, etc.) wanted to flout nondiscrimination laws and not serve LGBT customers. Schieffer was "in the dark" because Tony Perkins was fabricating the truth. On the other side, they accept the idea that nondiscrimination policies are a "very real threat to religious freedom" because a vast network of commentators, organizations, radio and cable news programs, and special interests are working together, always on message, to shape public opinion. Schieffer presumably employs more well-rounded newsgathering techniques, which is why, even if he's likely heard of these kinds of cases, Tony Perkins' versions of events still sounds like fiction. </p>
<p><img class="media-image media-image-left" height="136" id="2" style="height: 136px; width: 250px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px; float: left;;" width="250" src="http://www.glaadblog.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/jim-daly-Focus.jpg?itok=ECTD6fBm" alt="" /></p>
<p>Which brings us back to Daly's overarching theme: the idea that the mainstream media is working against him, coupled with the tangential notion that a failure to accept the anti-LGBT crowd's stated beliefs is tantamout to "media bias." As I said, this idea of a "liberal mainstream media" is a very popular and convenient attack line for social conservatives who want to convince supporters that there is some sort of conspiracy working against them. But in addition to this sense of victimization, which they use to drum up funds and action, commentators like Daly use these lines as a way to pull onus off of their goals. The thought, from their perspective, is that if they can convince you there's a media culture that's deliberately shaping people's minds to believe that anti-LGBT views are discriminatory, then they can make the entire push from our side seem contrived and media-crafted while making their own goals seem unfairly maligned. "We're not really discriminating against LGBT people," they say. "Those folks in Hollywood and New York just sold out to the homosexual agenda."</p>
<p>But a few things about this.</p>
<ol><li>In cases like this New Mexico photography case, we're not just talking about media. In this instance, we're talking about a state, its human rights commission, its policies, and its court system. The high court of New Mexico determined that the NM Human Rights Act does, in fact, prevent a business owner from pointedly discriminating against a person on the base of a number of factors, with sexual orientation being one among a long list. The media didn't just invent this idea in order to upset Jim Daly. The state implemented a policy in order to help the good order of its communities, and learned judges upheld the policy becayse they have been trained to weigh such matters.</li>
<li>Folks like Daly can't force us to subscribe to their narratives. Daly tells of a reporter who supposedly met him with incredulousness when the Focus prez tried to raise a point about marriage equality "threatening" religious liberty to which he has personally subscribed. But in truth, any number of people would meet this idea with scrutiny because we choose to get our news from sources other than the usual places that push and rehash these same socially conservative memes. But it's not some sort of "agenda" in the way that Mr. Daly and the like describe it. Those of us who have gotten to know (or are) LGBT people, who have studied this issue from an objective place, who have genuinely entertained and engaged both sides of the conversation, and who have considered how civil law is made and upheld in this church/state-separated nation of ours have come to our places of understanding in an organic way. </li>
</ol><p>Yes, many people who are in the information business will raise an eyebrow when the head of one of America's best known religious right groups—one that has funded many campaigns against marriage equality, we must note— tries to convince them that Bob &amp; Joe's committed union threatens religious freedom. So do many judges. And academic leaders. And civil rights icons. And Presidents of the United States. And public figures of every stripe and from all political parties. We didn't all get to where we are because of some invite-only secret meeting in the early part of the 21st century wherein we formulated some sort of dastardly plan to ruin Jim Daly's day. We got to where we are because, unlike the average socially conservative commentator, we chose to keep and open mind and committed ourselves to a well-rounded study. That's not an agenda—it's just good sense.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pubdate field-type-datetime field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single">August 30, 2013</span></div></div></div>
<div class="field field-name-field-issues field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/news">News</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/issues/local-and-regional-news">Local and Regional News</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/family">Family</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/issues/religion-and-faith">Religion and Faith</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<!--
THIS FILE IS NOT USED AND IS HERE AS A STARTING POINT FOR CUSTOMIZATION ONLY.
See http://api.drupal.org/api/function/theme_field/7 for details.
After copying this file to your theme's folder and customizing it, remove this
HTML comment.
-->
<div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/marriage-equality">Marriage Equality</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/new-mexico">New Mexico</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/focus-family">Focus on the Family</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/jim-daly">Jim Daly</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/glaadcap-0">#glaadcap</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/religious-liberty">Religious Liberty</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
Fri, 30 Aug 2013 14:48:20 +0000jeremyhooper67853 at http://www.glaad.orghttp://www.glaad.org/blog/jim-daly-failure-subscribe-our-talking-points-media-bias#commentsFormer GLAAD intern schools anti-gay activist on The Daily Showhttp://www.glaad.org/blog/former-glaad-intern-schools-anti-gay-activist-daily-show
<div class="field field-name-field-blog-featured field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><img class="media-image" height="140" id="2" style="height: 140px; width: 200px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px; float: left;;" width="200" src="http://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/549414_300926389981473_652822991_n.jpg?itok=KM0eVPcr" alt="" /><a href="http://www.mediaite.com/tv/the-daily-show-hilariously-skewers-christians-calling-gay-people-intolerant/">The Daily Show</a> took on the issue of gay and Christian persecution, and called GLAAD's former Religion, Faith &amp; Values intern, Todd Clayton to tell them about the bullying and persecution he has endured, not as a Christian, but as a gay person.</p>
<div style="background-color:#000000;width:420;">
<div style="padding:4px;">
<iframe frameborder="0" height="265" src="http://media.mtvnservices.com/embed/mgid:cms:video:thedailyshow.com:427240" width="420"></iframe><p style="text-align:left;background-color:#FFFFFF;padding:4px;margin-top:4px;margin-bottom:0px;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;"><b><a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-june-17-2013/left-behind">The Daily Show with Jon Stewart</a></b><br />Get More: <a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/">Daily Show Full Episodes</a>,<a href="http://www.comedycentral.com/indecision">Indecision Political Humor</a>,<a href="http://www.facebook.com/thedailyshow">The Daily Show on Facebook</a></p>
</div>
</div>
<p>Todd was a student at Point Loma Nazarene University in San Diego, California, where he was removed as Director of Spiritual Life for being gay, a story he documents in <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/todd-clayton/coming-out-at-christian-universities_b_1242404.html">The Huffington Post</a>. Todd was GLAAD's Religion, Faith &amp; Values Intern from October 2012 until April 2013. He contributed heavily to <a href="http://www.glaad.org/blog/toddclayton">GLAAD's blog</a> with posts on religion news and commentary about racial justice, faith, and LGBT life.</p>
<p>The Daily Show, through its humorous style, reminded viewers of a few things. First, that gay Christians exist, a point that is forgotten by many. Second, gay Christians feel far more persecution for being gay than for being Christian. Anti-gay activists are using a "religious liberty" argument, which you see prominently in the clip. But, as Todd says, "It's essentially a giant temper tantrum, that they don’t get to be in charge anymore, and that they have to share their toys."</p>
<p>Well said, Todd. </p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pubdate field-type-datetime field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single">June 18, 2013</span></div></div></div>
<div class="field field-name-field-issues field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/entertainment">Entertainment</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/issues/television">Television</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/news">News</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/issues/religion-and-faith">Religion and Faith</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<!--
THIS FILE IS NOT USED AND IS HERE AS A STARTING POINT FOR CUSTOMIZATION ONLY.
See http://api.drupal.org/api/function/theme_field/7 for details.
After copying this file to your theme's folder and customizing it, remove this
HTML comment.
-->
<div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/daily-show">The Daily Show</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/todd-clayton">Todd Clayton</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/religious-liberty">Religious Liberty</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:09:07 +0000rossmurray66579 at http://www.glaad.orghttp://www.glaad.org/blog/former-glaad-intern-schools-anti-gay-activist-daily-show#commentsColorado Passes Civil Union Legislation for Gay and Lesbian Coupleshttp://www.glaad.org/blog/colorado-passes-civil-union-legislation-gay-and-lesbian-couples
<div class="field field-name-field-blog-featured field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><img class="media-image" height="166" id="2" style="height: 166px; width: 250px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px; float: left;" width="250" src="http://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/gay13n-1-web.jpg?itok=uHBN1byX" alt="" />On Tuesday, the Colorado House of Representatives voted 39-26 to pass the "Colorado Civil Unions Act." The legislation, when signed by the governor, will take effect on May 1<sup>st</sup> and will provide legal recognition for lesbian and gay couples throughout the state. For a state that failed to pass a similar act in 2012, and that passed a constitutional ban on marriage for gay and lesbian couples in 2006, Tuesday's vote serves as a testament to progress.</p>
<p>When the final vote was read, an audible whoop of support issued from the House floor. While this act undoubtedly means progress for Colorado, it falls short of full equality. Along with the rest of the nation, gay and lesbian Colorado residents are looking toward the Supreme Court rulings on DOMA and California's Proposition 8 at the end of the month to see what their futures might hold. If the Supreme Court rules state bans on marriage equality to be inconsistent with the national constitution, Colorado may find itself, along with the remaining 41 states that have yet to legalize marriage for all couples, staring at an even more exciting reality.</p>
<p>So long as marriage is restricted to straight couples in the United States, civil unions will never be enough for the LGBT community. Injustice in any state is a threat to justice in every state.</p>
<p><img class="media-image" height="166" id="2" style="height: 166px; width: 250px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px; float: right;;" width="250" src="http://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/state-flag-colorado.jpg?itok=FMJ9CT76" alt="" />Anti-gay activists in Colorado are already protesting the Civil Unions Act passage, claiming that the legislation stands as a direct threat to their religious liberty. What anti-LGBT religious people across the nation seem to miss is that their liberty is in no way threatened by the securing of equality for gay and lesbian couples. While religious persons are entitled to practice sexism, racism, and homophobia in their places of worship, they have no right to weaponize their insensitivity and injustice in the public square in order to further marginalize LGBT Americans.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/13/obama-gay-marriage-states_n_2866355.html">In an historic statement</a>, President Obama said this week in an interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos that he cannot imagine a future in which state bans on marriage equality stand as constitutional: "That’s part of the reason I said, ultimately, I think that, same-sex couples should be able to marry. That’s my personal position. And, frankly, that’s the position that’s reflected -- in the briefs that we filed -- in the Supreme Court."</p>
<p>GLAAD is actively working with the <a href="http://www.respectformarriage.org/">Respect for Marriage Coalition</a>, as well as with the <a href="http://www.lighttojustice.org/">United for Marriage</a> coordinating team, to bring your voice to DC and make sure you are fully represented and informed. It is time for our nation's highest court to ensure that lesbian and gay couples are treated fairly under the law. Find an upcoming event near you to make clear your support for marriage equality. Visit <a href="http://www.glaad.org/marriage">www.glaad.org/marriage</a> to learn more, and join us in Washington D.C. on March 26 and 27.<br /><br /> </p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pubdate field-type-datetime field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single">March 13, 2013</span></div></div></div>
<div class="field field-name-field-issues field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/issues/news">News</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<!--
THIS FILE IS NOT USED AND IS HERE AS A STARTING POINT FOR CUSTOMIZATION ONLY.
See http://api.drupal.org/api/function/theme_field/7 for details.
After copying this file to your theme's folder and customizing it, remove this
HTML comment.
-->
<div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">
<div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div>
<ul class="field-items">
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/civil-union">civil union</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/civil-unions">Civil Unions</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/colorado">Colorado</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/marriage-equality">Marriage Equality</a>, </li>
<li class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/religious-liberty">Religious Liberty</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:54:36 +0000toddclayton63713 at http://www.glaad.orghttp://www.glaad.org/blog/colorado-passes-civil-union-legislation-gay-and-lesbian-couples#comments